The following is the transcript of an e-mail interview between Examiner.com and Noam Chomsky.
Examiner.com: As someone who has advocated, written about and worked for progressive causes for many years, what was your reaction to Obama's victory on Election Day?
Chomsky: I was pleased that he won. A McCain victory could, I think, have been extremely dangerous, and the fact that a Black family will be in the White House is a matter of considerable significance.
Examiner.com: In what ways do you believe an Obama presidency will help and/or hurt progressive causes in the United States?
Chomsky: I presume that some of the harsher edges of recent policies will be smoothed, as has already happened to an extent during the second Bush administration, in the international arena at least.
Examiner.com: In what ways do you believe that Obama represents true change? In what ways does he not represent change?
Chomsky: With the rhetorical flourishes stripped away, Obama presents himself as more or less as a familiar centrist Democrat, roughly on the Clinton model. His early appointments and advisers conform to that judgment.
Examiner.com: There has been a lot of talk in the news media about the historical nature of Obama's victory, with connections being made between Martin Luther King's "I have a dream" speech and the rise of an African American to the presidency. Do you see Obama's election as a culmination of King's "dream"? Why or why not? What does the election of a black president mean for the United States?
Chomsky: The election, along with the fact that the other Democratic candidate was a woman, indicate that the country has become much more civilized since the 1960s, when this would have been unthinkable. The progress is a tribute to the activism of the 60s and its aftermath. But there is a long, long way to go to approach King's "dream" -- which was not limited to the fate of oppressed minorities: the last years of King's life were devoted to the needs of the poor and suffering generally, here and abroad. He was assassinated as he was seeking to organize a poor people's movement, and after he had taken a strong stand against US aggression in Indochina.
Examiner.com: In his acceptance speech, Obama said that his election does not by itself bring change -- that it only brings the opportunity for change. What can progressives do to ensure that their voice is heard in an Obama administration? What, if anything, are progressives doing now to mobilize in response to an Obama presidency?
Chomsky: Obama energized a great many people, mostly young. If they fade away, or simply take instructions, we can expect little from his administration. If they become organized and active, and undertake to be independent voices in policy formation and implementation, a great deal can be achieved -- as in the past, and elsewhere today, notably South America.
Comments
Obama has selected unbelievably pro-war cabinet members, to the extent that any hopes of his being "the peace candidate" can now be considered ludicrous. In addition, he voted to renew the Patriot Act, he voted to expand the permission to spy on Americans (FISA vote about 3 months ago) and he strenuously urged and voted for the bailout of Wall Street bankers. Of all the clues he has given us, the most disgusting to me personally is his blatant lying against Russia in the Georgia/Russian conflict, and his assisting with the propaganda against Iran.
I think Chomsky's last point was important; These next four years might be the most useful time to write your Senator, make documentaries on important issues, and hit the streets; we might not feel quite as lame and helpless anymore.
Chomsky, as usual, hits the nail on the head. There's a huge difference between the kind of elected officials (and the system of government, or lack thereof, and the economic system) that we need and by rights ought to have on one hand, and what we can hope to achieve under the present circumstances we inherit from the past.
That's not to say we give up on achieving more. We have to remember our goals, the goals of most people on the planet it seems, like peace and freedom, justice, cooperation, organization. And we have to remember how elected officials, systems, real programs, always seem to fall short.
Every president since WW2, as Chomsky says, should be tried as a war criminal. Etc. Obama is not our messiah, and we lay down our protest signs at our (and the world's) great peril.
But Obama is an improvement, and writing someone like Obama off (as some of my friend seem eager to do) without weighing what we might reasonably get in the way of progress during such an administration is pointless, wasteful and ultimately harmful to the goals of achieving real progress for the majority of people.
An Obama administration is very likely to help millions of people in ways that Bush or McCain never did or would do, and in ways that really count if you're living close to the edge. A small improvement in minimum wage, for example, or an extension of health care to previously uninsured children or adults makes a world of difference in the people's lives who are affected. The Employee Free Choice Act, closing Gitmo, an OSHA ergonomics standard, changing or repealing No Child Left Behind, or something on that order may not be the change that you or I would pick if a genie gave us three wishes. But it would be a start.
The most important thing to remember, though, is Chomsky's last point above: no politician is ever going to hand it to us; we have to organize and make it happen.
Don't you get it Noam? Lenin said that when faced with opposition, the revolution should take two steps back. The corporatist fascist revolution does not actually care about "social justice." They have co-opted the movement and are not at all offended by a black president. In fact, all the better to divide society and stir up racial tensions! McCain, Obama, and Hillary were candidates of the corporatist fascists all along. They eventually chose Obama because he is perfect to lull the majority to sleep. With McCain or Hillary as president, there would have been opposition and agitation from both the right and left. Now, they only have to placate the right.
I am surprised that Noam Chomsky, he who authored Manufacturing Consent, is blind to this. He should be treating the recent elections as the confirmation of his thesis!
Chomsky has made a career apologizing for some of the worst regimes in human history while pretending to be an anarchist. Like Obama, Chomsky is all rhetoric.
MP, when you make statements like that (which are false) you should at least make some sort of attempt to back it up with a modicum of proof, anecdotes, something.
Don't hold your breath for any real progress, except possibly foreign policy with BO and HRC running the show.
Does Larry Summers really think girlies can't do math/
wow, noam, say it ain't so? showing support of a capitalist politician? how sad.
Two things first: We must take in account that this is a very small and simple article. If you want to read Chomsky's full thoughts on Obama, hit Znet.
Secondly, we got to take in account that Chomsky doesn't even talk about politics in the interview. He says that that Obama is a great symbol, that he's not so different from past presidents and that finally, the election of Obama might make people more organized and active, which is mostly the way he understands how anarchism starts.
It cracks me up,,, No one seems to have the maturity, reason or intelligence to realize that progression is just that. We will not go from where we are now a social democracy, let alone any kind of functional anarchy, because of a preidential election. Anyone should be able to see that Obama is a progressive step away from where we've been. And yeah, it's a small step. But I'll take it. And I'll be right with Noam as he criticizes Obama, which he does. You know, presidents don't need suppoters, they need a boss, and thats us. We are respocible for what our presidents do. So be respocible for Obama. Take responcibility for his actions like a good boss should. We need to change the nature of this whole debate and soon. There are no more politics. We just have to do the right thing regardless of which flag it flys under.
We should all heed Chomsky's opinion, on here and elsewhere. What we ignore from this great man is at our own peril. He only, as always, cares about real freedom and citizen inclusion in politics. Thanks for the post.
DM has it right. In the scripted politics of America, only those who support the plutocracy even get a chance to run for high office, or get their views aired in the "free media". Obama is there because he passes the test. But to say that Chomsky is "blind" to this is a bit unfair.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!